![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Burdaplay ( talk) 14:13, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
The standard excuse "I read it for the articles" had a lot of pop-culture prominence during the 1970s and/or 1980s (even featured on TV Tropes), and should probably be mentioned in the article... AnonMoos ( talk) 04:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
In the mid-90s, the company sued several former playmates for including the word on their websites, claiming that the company had the exclusive right to use the word; see http://articles.latimes.com/1998/mar/15/local/me-29162 etc... AnonMoos ( talk) 04:39, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Moved here from Wikipedia talk:Why create an account? -- John of Reading ( talk) 09:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Playboy has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please Change: With a regular display of full-page color cartoons, it became a showcase for notable cartoonists, including Harvey Kurtzman, Jack Cole,[7] Eldon Dedini,[8] Jules Feiffer,[9] Shel Silverstein,[10] Erich Sokol,[5] Gahan Wilson, and Rowland B. Wilson.[11] to: With a regular display of full-page color cartoons, it became a showcase for notable cartoonists, including Harvey Kurtzman, Jack Cole,[7] Eldon Dedini,[8] Jules Feiffer,[9] Shel Silverstein,[10] Erich Sokol,[5] Roy Raymonde, Gahan Wilson, and Rowland B. Wilson.[11] Please see: Verifiable Reliable Source: [1] [2] [3] Pollissimo ( talk) 09:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
References
![]() | This
edit request to
Playboy has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please correct for circulation as of 12/31/2014. Correct circulation as of 12/31/2014 per Alliance for Audited Media is 1,008,033. [1]
207.191.5.126 ( talk) 20:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Done
Umm... does it seem right that there is no mention of nudity anywhere in the lead section? The fact that Playboy (always) features nude pictorials is surely a salient aspect of the magazine that deserves mention upfront. - dcljr ( talk) 18:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
This article is garbage. Playboy magazine originated and until about the time Christie took over was known for its upper-body semi-nude women and risqué, lascivious, and frank discussion of sex, often expressing a misogynic outlook. It was known both for the beautiful women it photographed, its jokes & cartoons, and its often substantive fiction and non-fiction. About the time Christie took over, they transitioned to full nudes and much more pornographic/sexual poses. (Speaking about the US edition.) I believe that the quality of their contributions declined precipitously as American culture came to understand that the objectification of women was wrong, and in response to declining sales its editors turned Playboy into just another (sleazy) porn mag, but that's just my take. The fact that the word "nude" doesn't appear in the lede is RISIBLE! Whoever wrote this should be deeply embarrassed. It became a significant cultural 'force' because of how it pushed the boundaries of the acceptable and how it accepted (and used) the fact that most men appreciate looking the bodies of young attractive women, and how it discussed sex in an era where such talk was taboo. This article goes out of its way to avoid discussion of all of this. Deeply flawed. 216.96.78.78 ( talk) 14:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Editora Abril, the original publisher of Brazilian Playboy edition, will keep it only until December 2015. But Playboy Enterprises licensed PBB Entertainment to publish Playboy from 2016 on. But PBB will resume publishing only in March 2016. So Brazil's dates will be properly marked as (1975—2015, 2016—) I don't know how it'll be worked, but if you want to see how, here's the source in Portuguese. That's it. Fasouzafreitas ( talk) 13:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)